Facebook invented a new time unit called the 'flick' and it's truly amazing
So what is a flick? A flick is one seven hundred and five million six hundred thousandth of a second — 1/705,600,000 if you prefer the digits, or 1.417233560090703e-9 if you prefer decimals. And why is that useful?
As a hint, here's a list of numbers into which 1/706,600,000 divides evenly: 8, 16, 22.05, 24, 25, 30, 32, 44.1, 48, 50, 60, 90, 100, 120. Notice a pattern? Even if you don't work in media production, some of those numbers probably look familiar. That's because they're all framerates or frequencies used in encoding or showing things like films and music. 24 frames per second, 120 hertz TVs, 44.1 KHz sample rate audio.
[...] Even the weird NTSC numbers in use due to certain technical constraints divide nicely. 23.976 (technically 24*(1,000/1,001)=23.976023976230 with the last 6 digits repeating) becomes exactly 29,429,400 flicks. It's the same for 29.97, 59.94, and any others like them. No more fractions or decimals needed whatsoever! How great is that?!
There is more detail and background information on GitHub.
Do you give a flick? How many flicks do you feel you have wasted on this article?
(Score: 2) by EETech1 on Wednesday January 24 2018, @03:30AM (6 children)
Yay, the common denominator!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by martyb on Wednesday January 24 2018, @03:58AM (2 children)
You sure have that right... there's a whole bunch of them, too:
outputs:
which works out to: 29 * 32 * 55 * 72
For those who might want to look into this further, check out the page on GitHub [soylentnews.org].
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Wednesday January 24 2018, @05:25AM (1 child)
Ahem... link broken sire!
(Score: 2) by martyb on Wednesday January 24 2018, @12:59PM
Doh! Corrected link: https://github.com/OculusVR/Flicks [github.com]
Thanks for pointing out my mistake, and so kindly at that!
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @05:40AM
CP/M & MS-DOS word processor I used to use, Mince/Scribble (later FinalWord II), set up the page in "micas" -- another very small unit (of length). From my bad memory it might have been 1/1000 of a printer's "point"? Or perhaps some fraction of a printer's "pica"? All page layout math was integer, paper sizes in inches or centimeters were all multiples of a mica. This was before PostScript came out, but the page representation scheme was flexible enough that they had no problem writing a Postscript printer driver for a later version.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday January 24 2018, @08:15PM
It doesn't count until you can express it in truly fundamental units [scientificamerican.com].
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Wednesday January 24 2018, @09:16PM
...or the least common multiple [wikipedia.org], perhaps?
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 1) by tftp on Wednesday January 24 2018, @03:34AM (4 children)
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @04:04AM
But Facebook... if we want to win, we gotta be like facebook. Quick, rewrite all your user stories and include how many flicks we can capture a user's attention
Bah... they can go flick off!
(Score: 2) by unauthorized on Wednesday January 24 2018, @06:17AM (2 children)
As a programmer, I can only cry every time someone insists on using their own unique special snowflake units. Unnecessary unit conversions are bad. Even if you are a true zen master of juggling between units, someone out there who is less capable than you will inevitably need to use your numbers, and they are likely to screw up. Standards are a good thing. We invent them for a reason.
Now, this doesn't mean that you should never diverge from standards, but there has to be a good reason that outweighs the downside of the extra complexity.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by DannyB on Wednesday January 24 2018, @02:31PM
My special snowflake unit is atto parsecs per micro fortnight. In a weird cosmic coincidence it is very close to 1 inch per second.
Google says 1 attoparsec per microfortnight = 1.00433 inch per second. That's less than half a percent difference. Or 1 inch per second = 0.995692 attoparsec per microfortnight.
So please express velocities in special snowflake units.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 3, Informative) by requerdanos on Wednesday January 24 2018, @07:41PM
of possible interest is that this "new unit" is not a unit that needs to be converted to/from, in the way that other units (miles ←→ kilometers, bytes ←→ libraries of congress) need conversion. Rather, it's designed as a subunit of many other already established and extant units, and thus self-converting by definition without rounding errors nor metric/imperial-style oopses.
No snowflakes seem to exist here, kind of like Key West, Florida, which has never in recorded history seen a temperature below freezing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @04:00AM (5 children)
Yeah, but is a kflick 1000 flicks or 1024?
(Score: 3, Informative) by maxwell demon on Wednesday January 24 2018, @05:25AM (3 children)
It's not memory, nor in any way related to memory, so 1000.
The reason memory is measured in powers of two is because of the way memory is addressed. And disk sizes were measured in powers of two because ultimately that disk files were written from memory, and you'd expect to be able to store 1kB of memory in 1kB on disk. Note however that already in floppy disk times a factor of 1024 was not consistently used for disks; a 1.44MB disk didn't have 1.44*1024*1024 bytes, but only 1.44*1000*1024 bytes.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 1) by shrewdsheep on Wednesday January 24 2018, @12:46PM (2 children)
Why would memory be addressed in powers of two? Memory is addressed linearly. Addresses can represented in any adicness you like. The address space up to know has always been bounded by a number that is a power of 2. Apart from that, powers of 2 are just in the brain of the developer.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Immerman on Wednesday January 24 2018, @03:09PM
Because the amount of addressable memory increases in power of two with the number of address lines available.
8 address lines? You can only address 256 memory locations. 32 address lines let you address 4,294,967,296 locations.
Similarly, all the internal logic of the memory controller is governed by the same power-of-two limitations. If you want to access 4,294,967,297 (2^32+1) addresses, then you're going to need at least 33 address lines and bits of computational horsepower, which increases production costs and means you're now capable of addressing a full 8+ (2^33) billion locations, so you may as well make all those addresses usable.
There were a LOT of years in the early days of computing where the incremental cost of such things were a considerable expense. The original IBM PC almost certainly used the 8088 rather than the nearly identical 8086 because it halved the number of physical address lines - even though that meant multiplexing the addresses and halving memory access speed. Even today it's not negligible - most PC's usually can only address memory moderately in excess of what a typical user is likely to employ - e.g. depending on model a "high capacity" i7+motherboard can only access 64 or 128GB of ram - 2 or three more address lines than needed for the typical upper-end 16GB consumer PC, and considerably less than some specialty applications would desire. And as you venture into considerably lower-powered microcontrollers, the incremental cost of each additional line becomes proportionally greater.
(Score: 3, Informative) by requerdanos on Wednesday January 24 2018, @07:43PM
Here you go.
(Score: 3, Funny) by DannyB on Wednesday January 24 2018, @02:33PM
1 kflick == 1.0049 chick flick.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 3, Informative) by jmorris on Wednesday January 24 2018, @04:14AM (10 children)
Techcrunch is a bunch of morons. Read the github readme and it directly contradicts them. The NTSC formats do NOT evenly divide, Facebook explicitly said "fuck that legacy crap" and ignored the biggest source of existing content. Which is probably the best and only thing to do at this point, we really DO need to ditch that hack and start resetting everything to 60 or 120 frames per second.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @05:24AM (1 child)
The solution to the problems caused by having to many different fixed framerates is not to add yet another video standard with another fixed framerate.
The only reasonable solution to this problem is to eliminate fixed framerates on our playback systems altogether.
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Wednesday January 24 2018, @07:45PM
You're in luck. Open Handbrake [handbrake.fr] and select "Peak Framerate (VFA)" on the "Video" tab.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Wednesday January 24 2018, @05:29AM (3 children)
You wouldn't notice a difference of less than one nanosecond anyway. Nor will any playback hardware likely be that exact.
Which is also why that unit is pointless: Using nanoseconds would work just as well.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @07:11AM (2 children)
Except GPU decoders that have their firmware crash from minute FPS inaccuracies.
(Score: 3, Touché) by maxwell demon on Wednesday January 24 2018, @08:03AM (1 child)
So you think we should introduce a new unit of time just because there exist horribly broken GPU decoders?
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Wednesday January 24 2018, @09:26PM
Sure, why not? Is this any different than supporting new device drivers, or updating libraries to allow support of additional device types? This sounds like a good way to deal with a panoply of sample/frame rates across a large population of existing devices and existing content. But of course I don't expect it to start showing up on my stopwatch app...
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by forkazoo on Wednesday January 24 2018, @05:58AM (3 children)
How on Earth did TechCrunch get the NTSC frame rate so exactly wrong? It would be like saying the Declaration of Independence was primarily focused on minor technical matters of daily life and explicitly omits any talk about high concepts like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
And really, since NTSC frame rates are the only thing that's really hard about dealing with media frame rates, the Flick seems like a unit that solves everything but the problem.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @07:20AM
>How on Earth did TechCrunch get the NTSC frame rate so exactly wrong?
They confused frames and fields. Color NTSC has about 59.94 fields per second (the earlier version had exactly 60).
(Score: 2) by DECbot on Wednesday January 24 2018, @06:37PM
You have touch the tao of Brogrammning. Now, embrace it and become a Bro!
cats~$ sudo chown -R us /home/base
(Score: 4, Informative) by requerdanos on Wednesday January 24 2018, @07:53PM
The Declaration of Independence [ushistory.org] expends voluminous and repetitious words on insulting the King (who it says is responsible for "a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny") and portraying the new world colonies as poor, helpless victims of his evil oppression.
Though we mostly quote and pay attention to the freedom-and-brotherhood parts now, the document frankly omits any talk about high concepts like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, except in passing.
Here's a nice PDF [saisd.net] that breaks down by color code how much space the Declaration devotes to each topic.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Wednesday January 24 2018, @04:54AM
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @07:54AM
I only care about Barns and not a flick about some flick. ;)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barn_(unit) [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Wednesday January 24 2018, @09:43AM (1 child)
Ahh, good old oxfordford dictionary.. Scroll down a bit and you'll find give someone the flick (or get the flick) - Reject someone (or be rejected) in a casual or offhand way. [oxforddictionaries.com]
Also it is a non-rare boulderisation of "flip" (as in "flipping someone off"/"flipping someone the bird")
And for those of you who enjoys comedies remember Herr Flick from 'Allo 'Allo? (esp. the joke "*answers phone* Flick at the gestapo [beat], no, I meant: Flick, at the gestapo")
So yeah - seems apt that facebook popularizes the "flick"
(Incidently - this is the third place I see this on, but no place really has pointed out _why_ the unit is needed/what it is intended for [might be in TFA, but as a rule of thumb I don't click on off-site stuff that has "facebook" in it])
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @10:02AM
It's right there in TFS.
As in, you can have precise synchronization between different framerates, with integers only. If you ever opened a subtitle file, you know it's all a mess of "00:00:23,147 --> 00:00:28,301" this and "{1475}{1673}" that. There are also all kinds of issues with video/audio/subtitle synchronization, especially when combining tracks from different sources.
I guess "flicks" are supposed to be the baseline timestamp in which all other (relevant for FB) timestamps can be expressed as integers. Of course, we'll likely end up with this instead. [xkcd.com]
(Score: 2) by Hyperturtle on Wednesday January 24 2018, @03:30PM (1 child)
Summary does not say why it is useful.
It seems to be something facebook will use because existing metrics are not convincing enough advertisers to spend even more money endlessly. So they made up a new metric they can slice up however they want as a unit of measuring product engagement with the ads and anything else they want to track; remember they want mostly video because its so much easier to track overall and embed stuff into that is hard to filter out via existing consumer technologies.
It doesn't matter if they get their specific numbers wrong. What matters is that its easy enough for a sales person to explain to a marketing person, neither of who understands any of it and just want to make money off you.
I expect this is entirely for the benefit of spinning advertising services with a metric they control.
Soon they will promise so many flicks per engaged user with video X targeted to similar like minded people makes money. It is not like any of those numbers are useful for most users--only some gamers even care about the 60/120fps numbers and that isn't what this is about anyway. Most movie playback settings don't show the frame rate unless you go out of your way to display it, and most people don't notice unless there is some other problem that causes stutter or unsmooth playback...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by requerdanos on Wednesday January 24 2018, @04:00PM
Well, except for conferring the ability to "divide... evenly" commonly used units such as "24 frames per second, 120 hertz... 44.1 KHz sample rate audio" and abstruse-but-common frame rates like "23.976 (technically 24*(1,000/1,001)=23.976023976230 with the last 6 digits repeating)... 29.97, 59.94" without need for pesky, inaccuracy-introducing "fractions or decimals."
I don't do audio/video editing every day, and I am no mathematician, but still, I assure the reader, for people with a toe in either field, the above is not only cool, but an adequate if admittedly slightly technical explanation of why the unit's useful.
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Wednesday January 24 2018, @03:52PM (1 child)
Up until fairly recently, I had very little respect for things like Justin Bieber and Facebook. I recognize what they do, I recognize their place and respective niches, but just didn't have a lot of respect for them.
Then...
The renown music geek Skrillex, who I respect and admire, made a single with Bieber.... Thus causing me to confer on Mr. Bieber begrudging, but genuine, respect.
This is even better.
Someone within Facebook seems to have done something super-geeky-cool with math and Facebook itself is recognizing and embracing that. That right there is news for nerds, and that matters to me.
Sure, they are still Bieber and Facebook, respectively, but Now With More Respect!
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday January 24 2018, @04:38PM
Like when Leonardo DiCaprio starred in "Catch Me If You Can".
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @05:16PM (2 children)
That title was so bad that it nearly prevented me from reading the article. I assumed it would be of no interest whatsoever, but be fair to user takyon I decided to read it before criticizing. I was pleasantly surprised to find an article of some minor interest rather than zero interest. Please, takyon, don't use ridiculous clickbait for a hyperlink even if it is the actual title of the linked content.
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Wednesday January 24 2018, @07:56PM (1 child)
Keep in touch with friends and family effortlessly with this one weird, old trick. Part three will shock you!
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Wednesday January 24 2018, @09:32PM
Link, please.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2) by The Archon V2.0 on Wednesday January 24 2018, @05:25PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ghs1922/7039039583 [flickr.com]
(That the image is on flickr is mere serendipity.)
(Score: 2) by crafoo on Wednesday January 24 2018, @09:09PM
OK, but what is that in Swatch Internet Time intervals? That's Beats, right? Why can't they just use that... or like, I don't know, nanoseconds.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday January 25 2018, @04:52AM
(Note, this new standard isn't compatible with NTSC timings, lacking 11 and 13 as divisors.))
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves